-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Herring [mailto:robh at kernel.org]
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2018 10:34 PM
To: A.s. Dong <aisheng.dong@nxp.com>

[...]

On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 07:24:40AM +0000, A.s. Dong wrote:

quoted

As the power domain API might change in the future for new SoCs,
although in a very low possibility, it's still better to make the
compatible string more SoC specific to avoid the possible version change for

new SoCs.

quoted

Due to there're still no users in kernel, it's safe to update it
without breaking anything.

Cc: Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>
Cc: Sascha Hauer <kernel@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Fabio Estevam <redacted>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: devicetree at vger.kernel.org
Suggested-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Dong Aisheng <aisheng.dong@nxp.com>

checkpatch says:

WARNING: Missing Signed-off-by: line by nominal patch author 'A.s. Dong
[off-list ref]'

Do you think if we can ignore this warning?

It seems checkpatch checks the email sender name as nominal patch author
which is abbreviated as 'A.S. Dong'. But I always use the full name in
upstreaming patches.

quoted

---
ChangeLog:
v5->v6:
 * new patch
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/freescale/fsl,scu.txt | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git
a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/freescale/fsl,scu.txt
b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/freescale/fsl,scu.txt
index 46d0af1..87fc4b4 100644

--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/freescale/fsl,scu.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/freescale/fsl,scu.txt

@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ This binding for the SCU power domain providers uses

the generic power  domain binding[2].

 Required properties:
-- compatible:		Should be "fsl,scu-pd".
+- compatible:		Should be "fsl,imx8qxp-scu-pd".

You can keep both if you think future SoCs will be compatible.

They're likely to be compatible AFAIK.

Just to be clear, you mean keep both of them?
e.g.
compatible: Should be "fsl,imx8qxp-scu-pd" or "fsl,scu-pd"
Can you please help clarify a bit more on why it's better to do that as I'm not quite
Understand?

And for later when mx8qm is supported, should we add it again as follows?
compatible: Should be "fsl,imx8qm-scu-pd", "fsl,imx8qxp-scu-pd" or "fsl,scu-pd"

Regards
Dong Aisheng

quoted

 - #address-cells:	Should be 1.
 - #size-cells:		Should be 0.

@@ -153,7 +153,7 @@ firmware {
 		};

 		imx8qx-pm {
-			compatible = "fsl,scu-pd";
+			compatible = "fsl,imx8qxp-scu-pd";
 			#address-cells = <1>;
 			#size-cells = <0>;

--

2.7.4